Strange brew: Why should buying a 6-pack be so difficult in Pennsylvania?

If the recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling regarding Sheetz and beer purchases has shown us anything it is that the time has come to revamp the state's liquor laws.

Consumers lost out in the 5-1 ruling last week that meant Sheetz customers could no longer buy six-packs of beer simply because the business did not allow people to drink any of that beer in the store.

Sheetz customers had been able to buy up to two six-packs of beer at the store because a separate area where food was sold had been set up for suds sales.

Bars, restaurants and takeout food places can sell six-packs under the state liquor law. The only other way to buy beer in the state is by the case from a beer distributor.

What the court focused on was Sheetz's policy to not allow beer drinking in the store.

The high court said Sheetz's retail dispenser license requires some beer to be consumed within the store. Sheetz had argued that the license did not mandate the on-site drinking, but the court countered "the primary purpose of a retail dispenser is to engage in the sale of beer for on-premises consumption, and that providing beer or takeout sales was only secondary."

This was a big victory for the Malt Beverage Distributors Association of Pennsylvania, which wants to limit where beer can be sold. This could have implications beyond the Altoona-based convenience store chain.

Wegmans, which has been granted a beer retail license could find itself impacted, especially because there are other cases filed that challenge grocery stores' ability to sell beer.

We are disappointed by the ruling and agree with Justice J. Michael Eakin who in his dissent said Sheetz should be allowed to ban on-premises drinking if it chooses to do so.

"The statute's plain language clearly does not require sales on-site, nor does it prohibit a retail dispenser from choosing to sell all its beer for takeout, and one requires no hypertechnical linguistic gymnastics to reach such a plain conclusion," Eakin wrote.

There should not be so many complications to a transaction that simply allows a person to purchase -- at the most -- 12 bottles or cans of beer.

The court's decision means that it is up to the Legislature to act. Lawmakers must change the liquor law so that consumers have a real choice on where they can buy beer. The one we have right now is falling flat on providing competition.